I know there is no way to convert you from being anti-shaq, but I'm not looking at 5 games, 4 of which were laker victories in any event. I based my decision on 3+ years of dominance over the entire league. He scores more points, gets more rebounds, blocks more shots, and frustrates opponents to all hell. It's ugly but just so effective, he's the guy I would want.
Duncan and Shaq still stand. Their jobs are to dominate games. Agreed? Shaq does it better. Shaq's stats: 01-02 Field goal pct: .579 PPG: 27.2 Career Field Goal pct: .577 PPG: 27.6 Playoff Field Goal pct: .560 PPG: 28.2 Duncan's: 01-02 Field goal pct: .508 PPG: 25.5 Career Field Goal pct: .509 PPG: 22.8 Playoff Field Goal pct: .494 PPG: 23.9 Goodbye Duncan
Well...here is my opinion on this. Shaq wouldn't have won 3 rings without Kobe...and Kobe wouldn't have won 3 rings without Shaq. True, Shaq would probably do more on his own with the Lakers than Kobe, but c'mon now. TD pretty much had the Spurs on his back and won the title! His supporting cast wasn't as NEAR AS GOOD as the Lakers. Sean Elliot, Mario Eley, DRob and whoever the SG was! TheCat has shown stats that TD is more valuable to his team than Shaq...and has more skills! Shaq is only a beast because of his weight and only has 3 rings because of...excuse me *cough*Dick Bavetta*cough* Sorry had to hack one up there...I hope you see my point, folks.
I already mentioned I don't think Shaq would fair as well with the Spurs as Duncan has. But if you want to continue to use playoffs as the sole factor in determining who is the best player then go right ahead. It just seems kind of lazy to me. Don't get me wrong, the playoff success of the team the player is on should be a factor, but it shouldn't be everything. By making my "fantasy world" as you call it, I'm just trying to isolate and compare players, rather than external factors like teammates and the playoff success his <b>team</b> has had. Well, this past season Duncan outrebounded shaq by two per game, blocked a couple more shots than shaq, shot 80% from the free-throw line instead of 55%. Yes, Shaq does have more rings, but so does Derek Fisher and Robert Horry. As far as the most dominant player in the history of the game, I think guys like Michael Jordan and Bill Russell who have won two or three times the amount of championships that Shaq has might disagree. Besides, I thought we were mainly talking about who we think is the best player right now, and not their lifetime achievements. Well, if Hakeem was playing with the 3rd best player in the league in Kobe Bryant, and Gary Patyon was playing on a team of non-allstar role players and the Sonics still managed to finish ahead of the Rockets, then yes, Gary Payton probably would be better...but that wasn't the case. However, in Shaq's fairness he did miss a lot of games this season due to injury, which could explain why their record was less than the Spurs. I didn't take that into consideration.
Duncan. Teams aren't built or major trades made to deal with the Duncan problem. Shaq is the single, undisputed, most dominant player in the league. There shouldn't be any question but that he would be the last one standing.
Shaq does dominate games more than Duncan. But that still won't save him from my personal avarice. I vote Shaq off.
I don't think there has ever been such a huge amount of irony packed into one, short statement in the history of the entire world.
"Hell, even your best case fantasy hypothetical scenario, that the Spurs would win 3 championships,is only equal to what Shaq has done in reality. So what does that prove? Reality says: more points, more rebounds, more blocks, more Final MVPS, more rings, most dominant player in the history of the game. " Shaq has Kobe ****ING Bryant. Take away one of the best coaches ever, and most likely one of the top 5 players ever, and what do you have? Shaq not winning a god damn thing. "Oh well thats fantasy thats not fair". Didn't this voting take place to tell who the best player is? When the "best player" has the "3rd best player" on his team, what do you think will happen? They won't by any chance be one of the most dominating teams of all time, while Shaq gets to dunk on losers such as Todd MacCulloch, David Robinson, and Dale Davis. This voting is complete idiocy.
And we should penalize him for this? You obviously didn't read my previous post. I have just as much basis to say he would do well without Kobe (which he did, leading the league in scoring and such) than you have to say that he would suck. Considering that he was doing all right for himself, (statistically, even better than Duncan is doing now) before Kobe matured, your statement about him "not winning a damn thing" is a bit of an exaggeration. It's really convenient for laker haters, they can always say "Kobe/Shaq wouldn't be as good without Kobe/Shaq". I can say things like that too. THe only reason why Michael Jordan was so great was because he had Pippen, and one of the greatest coaches of all time. The only reason why Phil Jackson is so great is because he has Shaq and Jordan and Bryant. Wow this is so easy! It automatically means you suck even if you win! What a great principle! The only reason why Vince Lomabardi was great was because he had all those hall of famers, who are only in the hall of fame because they played for Vince Lombardi! The only reason why peanut butter is great is because of jelly, but jelly is the reason why peanut butter is good!
Sorry, I can't let someone that "dominates" by using blatant non-called offensive fouls to get half his points and who disappears in the 4th quarter. Bye, Shaq. Go eat another Whopper.
